Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ex-Trump adviser Flynn seeks immunity for testimony in Russia probe: WSJ

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 121 posts

Re: Ex-Trump adviser Flynn seeks immunity for testimony in Russia probe: WSJ

#41

Post by jerf »

CalChris wrote: post #24
jmaygarden wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

5 people were granted immunity in Hillary Clinton's email scandal and nothing came of it.

True and similarly despite the Senate Finance Committee having requesting exactly what the IRS did, target, Issa never offered Republican appointed Lois Lerner immunity. Republicans never charged her with anything but passed a contempt citation to cover their asses.

I have to admit that at this point, I'd just like to see somebody, somewhere, convicted of something, in a way that carries some sort of real consequences (i.e., no "yep, they're guilty, and the penalty is to retire from the public eye with all their ill-gotten gains and enjoying them until the day they die, except maybe if they take a break to write a book about their experiences for a couple million dollars" crap).

Think about it. When's the last time that happened at this level? Why should anyone at that level be concerned about a FBI investigation, or a Congressional probe, or anything else? When's the last time that amounted to anything at all?

I honestly don't hardly care who or which side of what aisle they are on. I do very much care that it be an accurate conviction, but that seems to be a target-rich environment right now.

Re: Ex-Trump adviser Flynn seeks immunity for testimony in Russia probe: WSJ

#42

Post by aanm1988 »

jMyles wrote: post #25
InclinedPlane wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uh, no. Aside from the fact that collusion between a foreign government and a presidential campaign would be extremely problematic that's not the major issue. The major allegation on the table right now is that the Russian government offered Trump a sizeable share of Rosneft, the Russian national petrochemical corporation, in exchange for dropping the sanctions against Russia due to the conflict in Ukraine, and both…

If what you are saying is true, I'm wrong and that's great. I thought that the Steele dossier was only being discussed (let alone investigated) on the Senate side of the Hill; I hadn't heard about the House Intel committee taking it up. I understood that the House side was still just about the "election hacking." Do you have a source?

The house side is a disaster right now. Nunes is the chair of the committee and his behaviour so far is very concerning. Specifically he went ot the white house to obtain information from staffers, then briefed Trump on it and went to the press before he went to his own committee. this from a man who was a part of Trumps team.

Edit: If you're downvoting because I'm wrong please correct me. If it's just because you don't like what I said then carry on I guess.

Re: Ex-Trump adviser Flynn seeks immunity for testimony in Russia probe: WSJ

#43

Post by generic_user »

wyldfire wrote: post #13
jMyles wrote: post #2

Listen, I know it's a big deal when the POTUS lies. But aren't we used to it by now? If Trump somehow manages not to be a criminal and a crook (which seems downright impossible), it will be highly unusual for the recent history of his office. Now: other than bluster, what is there actually about this "Russia" probe? What exactly are we investigating? Whether Russia was involved in "fake news" stories? Whether Russia…

I think the level of infighting in the US and Europe now is different from anything I've seen over the last couple of decades. The democratization of media is a net benefit but it helped bring about a world's worth of people seeking out news that matches their world view. It's made it very easy to spawn animus and make everything into an "us vs them" issue. I think Russia is overtly and covertly involved in an effort…

So the alternative is to keep a population held together with a narrative manufactured by the central state along side a brutal military police apparatus to manage compliance.

I think the real culprit is that the masters of the universe who crashed the economy have not been able to put humpty dumpty back together again. And only managed to make the upper 1% fabulously wealthy why the rest of the population has a sinking standard of living and lower long term wealth prospects.

Even tho its ugly what we have now its the best thing that could happen. If the states and regions reassert there rights and set there own policy independent of federal government the result is more power to the state citizens. And a smaller circle of corruption with more accountability.

And if the Russians are involved then they have complete control of both federal parties because the main source of friction comes directly out of the ideology of both parties that use division to try to segregate the electorate and practice scorched earth on the other side.

Re: Ex-Trump adviser Flynn seeks immunity for testimony in Russia probe: WSJ

#45

Post by [deleted] »

aanm1988 wrote: post #36
jMyles wrote: post #2

Listen, I know it's a big deal when the POTUS lies. But aren't we used to it by now? If Trump somehow manages not to be a criminal and a crook (which seems downright impossible), it will be highly unusual for the recent history of his office. Now: other than bluster, what is there actually about this "Russia" probe? What exactly are we investigating? Whether Russia was involved in "fake news" stories? Whether Russia…

Yes, was russia involved in fake news. Yes, did Russia hackthe DNC. More importantly. Who knew what, and when. Members of Trumps team had contact with Russia. Flynn already resigned over this. Sessions has had to recuse himself because of this. Nunes has engaged in questionable behaviour over this. Manafort had some sort of business relationship with a powerful Russian close to Putin. There is a dossier from a "credi…

[deleted]

Re: Ex-Trump adviser Flynn seeks immunity for testimony in Russia probe: WSJ

#46

Post by cperciva »

jmaygarden wrote: post #9
doctorshady wrote: post #4

As of now, it looks like nobody has taken his offer of immunity for testimony. What are the implications of this? The commentators on other sites seem to imply this means investigators already know something big.

5 people were granted immunity in Hillary Clinton's email scandal and nothing came of it.

Did they ask for immunity, or were they offered it?

Anyone who is offered immunity will take it -- there's no reason not to -- but that doesn't mean they needed it or knew anything worth testifying to. But when you hear "please, someone -- anyone -- give me immunity!" from a suspect, it rather increases the odds that they have a strong reason for wanting immunity.

Re: Ex-Trump adviser Flynn seeks immunity for testimony in Russia probe: WSJ

#47

Post by i2amsam »

camperman wrote: post #19
jMyles wrote: post #2

Listen, I know it's a big deal when the POTUS lies. But aren't we used to it by now? If Trump somehow manages not to be a criminal and a crook (which seems downright impossible), it will be highly unusual for the recent history of his office. Now: other than bluster, what is there actually about this "Russia" probe? What exactly are we investigating? Whether Russia was involved in "fake news" stories? Whether Russia…

> If Trump somehow manages not to be a criminal and a crook (which seems downright impossible) The vast surveillance apparatus of the deep state have crawled everything they have on Donald Trump and all they could come up with was some locker room banter from 11 years ago. The man is straight as an arrow and has been for decades. > Now: other than bluster, what is there actually about this "Russia" probe? What exactl…

I expect you're receiving downvotes (not from me) because you're introducing a strawman argument.

The issue under investigation is if there was collusion between members of Trump's campaign and foreign operatives to, e.g. time releases or coordinate messaging, not attack the voting apparatus. The fact that the national security advisor lied to the VP about discussions with Russia (for which he was fired) and now will only testify under oath with immunity suggest that there indeed may be something worth investigating there.

Re: Ex-Trump adviser Flynn seeks immunity for testimony in Russia probe: WSJ

#48

Post by hackuser »

Has the United States ever convicted someone on the level of National Security Advisor (i.e., effectively a member of the cabinet, such as Secretary of Defense), or even put them on trial? Petraeus got a slap on the wrist, but for actions while he was a General.

In other countries, even the heads of state get put on trial. Off the top of my head, it's happened relatively recently in France and Israel. In the U.S., I can't think of even a member of the cabinet being tried; on the order of 1 federal judge has ever been impeached. Nixon was pardoned, for example.

Someone mentioned 5 people were granted immunity for the Clinton investigation; were any of the 5 at such a high level? Has someone on that level ever been given immunity or needed it?

Re: Ex-Trump adviser Flynn seeks immunity for testimony in Russia probe: WSJ

#49

Post by pessimizer »

rhizome wrote: post #5
doctorshady wrote: post #4

As of now, it looks like nobody has taken his offer of immunity for testimony. What are the implications of this? The commentators on other sites seem to imply this means investigators already know something big.

I'd guess he'll plead the Fifth.

Can you do that if you're offered immunity?
Post reply on HN